I've been asked to test the solo aspect if Bloody April by Terry Simo GMT games.
If you have the slightest interest in WW1 airwarfare I suggest you check it out and pre order. Solo apsect is from the Allied side only but it is really a two player game. Lots of planning etc involved.
I've just read the rulebook and all the charts etc and now on my first play test as two player...honestly from what I can see it's everything you could wish for in a WW1 airwarfrae game..the map in VASSAL is pefect as is all the other art\counter etc. The game emchanics are brilliant and you name it it's in there, especially if you start using the optional\advanced rules. More thamn highly reccomended when it comes out Q2 next year.
Links below. [/url]
SOme great AAR's further on...7@.1dd43edd/92]
Below is something terry posted over at consim
"The main components of air combat in WW1 are portrayed in Bloody April. Wind and Weather have a huge impact and are complex than depicted in Downtown/EV. Differences in altitude have a huge effect in WW1 combat and the Time to Climb calculations (which are fairly easy with the counter tracking) but are more complex than DT/EV. Flight mechanics will be familiar to players of the earlier games but have more depth in that there can be gliding flight and spinning flight. However, only one type of flight can be selected for the entire game turn -- so Level, Climb, Dive are your standards and Gliding/Spinning flight are more exceptions. So both simpler and complex than DT/EV. Combat for the initial clash is the same as DT/EV but now can be extended into a Dogfight to depict the longer engagement times of WW1 -- so more complex if getting into a Dogfight. Aircraft taskings -- definitely more complex with the number of options although they are all fairly simple - there is more detail. Recon, Arty Coop, Contact Patrols, Balloon Busting, Bombing, Trench Strafing -- so more complex there. Detection and Visual Sighting are both simpler and more complex in BA vs DT/EV as you now take into account being Tally on a target to improve your odds of engaging -- there are three states that a flight can be in the game -- Undetected, Detected and Visually Identified (Tally). The ability to track individual pilots/crews with named/rated aircraft can be viewed as adding a level of complexity. Rulebook will shorter in length than DT/EV but packed with rules. Tables are still needed for certain actions but I've always found the DT/EV/BA tables easy to use. As best as can be cobbled into a boardgame, I feel we have captured the essence of what WW1 air combat would be like at a strategic/tactical hybrid level. You'll have daring escapes by Recon aircraft, Dogfights that last minutes vs seconds and quick kills. Dashing Balloon attacks through heavy AA. You'll have 60-80 aircraft doing what most games only show 2-4 aircraft doing in previous games. There is a narrative to the missions -- you'll dread seeing Jasta 11 show up behind your Offensive Patrol and know that someone isn't coming home. You'll have wind gusts and dud engines. Navigation errors, Flaming Onions, Artillery shoots. Flying on the deck looking for your advancing troops or enemy points of resistance. Bombing raids on railyards and lines of communications. This is not Wings of War or a simple game of WW1 combat although it is also not a detailed modeling of the actual maneuvering of aircraft in combat but the hunt and the chase to get to combat is modeled very well. All of the taskings will give you a unique perspective on what those guys went through - especially the recon 2-seaters. More complex than DT/EV -- yes in alot of ways, no in others. I rarely refer to rules while in play but the charts are used regularly. There are Optional and Advanced rules that can be omitted to make the game less complex so that would be up to the individual player. Anyway - hope that explains a bit more. I hope to start posting some updated examples of play as we finish up the last bits of rules tweakin."